RE: Comments please?

Hi Katherine, thanks for the feedback. These are part of my master's
work (ongoing). Yes, perhaps the 1/2 should read 1 of 2. This is a way
the Aussies have of categorising prints that have no exact duplicates,
but are part of a quasi-edition. Good, not good????
I'd like to see yours when you have it scanned.
Cheers
Kate

-----Original Message-----
From: Katharine Thayer [mailto:kthayer@pacifier.com]
Sent: Friday, 22 July 2005 9:55 a.m.
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Comments please?

Kate M wrote:
>
> Hi, I've just posted some new images on my site
> http://www.katemahoneyphoto.co.nz/Close2u_intro.htm
> I would like some feedback - any comments gracefully and gratefully
> accepted :)
>

I like 'em, Kate.

It looks like we're on some kind of parallel path, because I'm doing a
series based on a similar kind of idea. Mine are 10-minute pinhole
exposures, so much blurrier and no detail, and not quite as close up,
and printed rather low-key and low-contrast, so the approaches are quite
different. The only similarity, I guess, is that mine are also sort of
ambiguous compositions based on the body. I've got one here in front of
me to scan, maybe I'll do that for comparison. Anyway, I like what
you're doing.

But I'm confused what is meant by "Unique State print, 1/2" ?

Katharine

-- 
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.16/50 - Release Date:
15/07/2005
 
-- 
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.16/50 - Release Date:
15/07/2005